Listen to the article
In a recent conversation, President Donald Trump and newly appointed HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. discussed their views on autism rates and potential causes, expressing concerns that have raised alarms among medical experts.
During the exchange, Trump claimed autism rates have risen dramatically, stating they went from “one in 20,000” to current rates of “one in 12 for boys” and approximately one in 18-19 for girls. While autism prevalence has indeed increased over decades, epidemiological data shows historical rates were closer to 1 in 2,000 to 1 in 10,000 in the 1970s-1980s, not as rare as 1 in 20,000.
Current CDC estimates place autism spectrum disorder prevalence at about 1 in 31 children overall, with higher rates among boys (approximately 1 in 25) than girls (about 1 in 70).
Trump suggested these increases are “artificially induced,” potentially by vaccines, recommending that vaccines be administered in smaller doses—”maybe 20 percent, 30 percent”—and separated rather than combined, as with the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.
The scientific consensus, however, contradicts these assertions. Numerous large-scale studies have found no causal link between vaccines and autism, including a 2019 study of over 650,000 children published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. Medical organizations worldwide, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, maintain that vaccines administered according to recommended schedules are safe and effective.
Both Trump and Kennedy focused heavily on acetaminophen (Tylenol) as a potential autism cause. “If you’re pregnant, and when the baby is born, don’t give it Tylenol,” Trump advised. “What do you have to lose?”
Kennedy further claimed that circumcised children have “double the rate of autism,” suggesting it’s “highly likely because they’re given Tylenol.” He acknowledged this evidence isn’t “dispositive” but argued it warrants attention.
Medical researchers caution that while some studies have suggested associations between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and neurodevelopmental outcomes, the evidence remains inconclusive and doesn’t establish causation. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists continues to consider acetaminophen safe when used as directed during pregnancy.
Trump made several additional claims about vaccination practices, stating the U.S. administers “82 vaccines simultaneously.” The U.S. childhood immunization schedule actually includes vaccines for approximately 18 diseases with multiple doses over time, totaling around 30-50 doses from birth to age 18—not 82 at once.
He also made comparisons to other countries, claiming Japan and Germany give significantly fewer vaccines, which is inaccurate. Most developed nations have similar vaccination recommendations, though scheduling may differ.
Trump referenced Amish communities, asserting they “don’t take any of this stuff” and have “virtually none, no autism.” Research contradicts this claim; Amish children do develop autism, though diagnosis rates may differ due to cultural factors and access to diagnostic services. Furthermore, many Amish do vaccinate their children, albeit at lower rates than the general population.
Throughout the discussion, Trump emphasized he is “a vaccine believer” who supports vaccines like polio, portraying his stance as one of moderation and “common sense” rather than anti-vaccine.
The exchange highlights the tension between personal beliefs about autism causation and the scientific consensus. Public health experts worry such high-profile discussions questioning vaccine safety could undermine confidence in vital public health measures at a time when immunization rates are already declining in parts of the country.
As this administration takes shape, medical organizations will be watching closely to see how these personal views might influence public health policy, particularly as Kennedy assumes leadership of a department that oversees crucial health agencies including the CDC and FDA.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
This discussion highlights the need for clear, transparent communication on complex health topics, especially when they involve high-profile figures. Accurate, evidence-based information is essential for sound policymaking.
Absolutely. Policymakers should seek guidance from medical experts and rely on peer-reviewed research, not anecdotal claims, when making decisions that impact public health.
The reported increase in autism prevalence rates over time is an important public health issue that merits further research and discussion. However, any claims linking this to vaccines require strong scientific evidence.
Absolutely, the scientific consensus rejects a causal link between vaccines and autism. Policymakers should rely on rigorous epidemiological studies, not unsubstantiated theories.
Interesting discussion on autism rates and vaccine policies. While the topic is complex, I hope public health experts can provide clear, evidence-based guidance to address concerns and ensure safe vaccination programs.
Agreed, vaccine safety and efficacy should be based on rigorous scientific research, not unfounded claims. Reliable data from health authorities is crucial for informed policy decisions.
Examining the accuracy of public statements on sensitive health topics is important, even for high-profile figures. Providing context and citing credible sources can help counter misinformation.
Yes, fact-checking is vital to maintain public trust, especially on issues that impact vulnerable populations. Clear communication from trusted experts is needed.
As an interested observer, I appreciate the efforts to fact-check statements made about vaccine policies and autism prevalence rates. Maintaining public trust requires diligent verification of claims, even from influential sources.
Well said. Ensuring the accuracy of information, especially on sensitive health topics, is crucial for informed public discourse and evidence-based decision-making.
While I appreciate the desire to ensure vaccine safety, any recommendations to alter standard vaccine schedules should be made with great caution and backed by robust medical data. Maintaining public confidence in immunization programs is crucial.
Well said. Deviating from established vaccination protocols without strong justification could undermine efforts to protect vulnerable populations and control infectious diseases.